[hackinthebochs]

> I'd rather have them ahead by 10 years because of trade secrets than getting 20 years of exclusivity through a patent

The difference is that had the invention been patented, the academic world could be advancing and building on the idea. Trade secrets effectively freeze the progress of an idea. Patents allow an idea to be advanced, even if no company could commercially benefit from the idea in the intervening time. Are we better off as a society with Watson's inner workings kept as a trade secret?

[bjt]

We're not forced to choose. Unlike a patent, a trade secret leaves anyone else free to invent and use the same idea.

[hackinthebochs]

>Unlike a patent, a trade secret leaves anyone else free to invent and use the same idea.

What is the probability that such an idea is independently recreated? Hard to say, but its likely inversely related to how ground-breaking the invention is, which are the ones that society benefits the most from them being made public.